Skip to main content

About your Search

20121224
20130101
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
the preoccupation of the committee and a preoccupation of the foreign policy and those concerned with foreign policy nationwide. why now? partly because this time we lost an ambassador and a great man. but mostly, it's because now benghazi isn't just a loss of diplomats, we have lost some before, but now there is a partisan advantage to be sought by one side or the other . this incident was an important, but is it more important than the north korean nuclear program? is it more important than the other subjects that haven't been the subject of so many hearings of this committee? we have now decided to focus on the politics security in part because we can blame one party or the other. we can blame the state department for not allocating its resources to diplomatic security or blame the republican congress for not appropriating the enough. we should do more for diplomatic security. this department should follow its own procedures, and we have not done so. we would like to believe in the world that is subject somehow to our control, that if we just do the right thing everything will turn out right. thi
are making on the vigor transforming the role of the day so very unfortunate results. you talk about foreign policy as being at least two ideas or and although she's in play and i would be interested -- i keep on thinking that you are a vietnam analogy by and we must stand tough but you wouldn't subscribe to that. >> it's a special representation in the first place which dominates the rest of the book and in vietnam i think you have to take them both together. you cannot be in munich or vietnam. munich is an ethnology that tends to thrive when the country has been in peace and prosperity for long enough it feels it can do anything. it feels it can intervene on behalf of subject and oppressed people around the world and it doesn't think about the cost it hasn't had to pay the cost for several decades now. vietnam is about taking care of one's own the and paying attention to how things can go wrong despite the best of intentions. if he were a total vietnam person you will be such a realist that would be crude you wouldn't have anything on the interest and to the nation requires ideals for the
, the system is failing. we are seeing evidence of a fiscally and also in foreign policy and evidence of it domestically when you can see a surveillance state arising under the noses of both political parties and. >> you talk about your alliance with ron paul. both of you are leaving. this is your last days in congress, at least this time. so who are your successors, who you see in congress right now who will carry on these struggles for privacy, against drones? >> i would hope people i have worked with in the past like barbara lee, alan grayson and others would continue the efforts. there are people on both sides of the aisle which expressed concern. you have to remember we put together a very powerful coalition in challenging the war in libya that was a collision between democrats and republicans that reflects a new concern about where is america going? why are we letting the president or the white house determine that we should expand war? we don't even involve congress anymore. i think you are going to see continued efforts. the question is, the strength of it. and the question is
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)